
029 822 363 6 




Hollinger Corp. 
pH 8.5 



BS 2615 
.G93 
Copy 1 




Judas Iscariot 



THE AUTHOR OF 



The Fourth Gospel, 

WHICH IS ASCRIBED TO ST. JOHN. 

C. S. GRIFFIN. 



> 



PRICE 10 CENTS. 





Copyrighted tiy Crawford S, Griffin in 1B32 






* 



BOSTON j 

THE SCOTT-PARKIN PRINTING COMPANY. 

1892, _ 



Nationalism, by C. S. Griffin, price 15 cents, deals with national- 
ism in its broadest economic view, in the spirit of the New Testa- 
ment, basing its argument upon the practicability and literal need of 
making the necessaries of life free to all, or in other words, giving us 
this day our daily bread, showing a practical method for keeping up 
its production, yet making the product free to all. This book shows 
that American free institutions are only in their infancy. We have 
free schools, highways, libraries, parks, menageries etc., but are 
destined to hare free food, clothing and shelter, which will make us a 
communistic state and all that Christ laid down as necessary to build a 
high Christianity upon. 












PREFACE 



The faets that brought this book out were stumbled upon in this 
way: One day I picked up a Bible that had at the beginning of each 
book some historical account of its origin and authorship. Among 
those I read the account of the book of St. John, which said that a 
majority of the early fathers ascribed this book to him, but that one 
or more had ascribed it to Peter. This caption cited one or two 
passages as evidence that John was the author. I turned to them 
and concluded that they did not sustain the position, and my curiosity 
being thoroughly aroused I carefully went through the book to see what 
else could be found relative to its authorship. Among the first things 
to inspire me was the clear and repeated evidence that the author 
purposely hid his own identity. There is abundant proof, which is 
cited in the following pages, that neither John or Peter could have 
been the author. While reading the last chapter I was startled with 
the thought that perhaps Judas Iscariot might be the author. After 
re-reading the book many times and the other gospels and the epistles, 
this startling thought was fully confirmed, the proof of which is taken 
from the book itself. I have looked for no evidence outside of the 
New Testament itself, and used but little outside of the fourth gospel 
to prove its authorship. As small as this pamphlet is, I have had it 
under examination more than five years, and have read not only the 
book itself but the whole New Testament many times through to get 
at the evidence pro and con upon the facts asserted. The substance 
of this pamphlet has been published in a newspaper. The fourth 
gospel is probably more dear to the Christian heart than any other, 
and when we understand its real origin it becomes doubly so, and 
throws added light upon the whole New Testament. 

C. S. Griffin, 

Boston, Mass., Apr. 25, 1892. 812 Washington Street. 



/ 



JUDAS ISCARIOT. 



I believe Judas Iscariot was the author of the book of St. John, the 
fourth gospel ; also the author of the three epistles ascribed to John. 
The history of the New Testament shows that the authorship of the 
book of John is in doubt, although a majority of the early fathers as- 
cribe this book to him, but a careful study of the book shows that John 
could not have been the author. 

Peter, James and John were the only three disciples present with 
Jesus upon the mount when Moses and Elijah materialized, or at the 
"•transfiguration" as it is called. (Luke ix. 28; Mat. xvii. 1; Mark ix. 
1.) This was the most remarkable thing John ever witnessed, yet the 
book of John makes no mention of such an occurance. Had John writ- 
ten the book he would certainly have mentioned this remarkable scene. 
We are therefore bouud to conclude that either John never saw the 
transfiguration, or John never wrote the book ascribed to him. 

At the raising of the daughter. John, Peter and James were the only 
three disciples present, according to the other gospels, (Luke viii. 49 : 
Mark v. 35,) but the book of John makes no mention of the occurrence. 
As John and only two others were specially chosen to witness these 
two most remarkable events, also his last prayer in Gethsemane, (Mat. 
xxvi. 37; Mark xiv. 33,) it is not probable that he would write a biog- 
raphy of Jesus and not mention either of them, and this is the more 
remarkable because the book of John is the most carefully written of 
the four gospels, and the book was so clearly written by an eye-wit- 
ness of what it relates that one can hardly doubt that the author was 
one of Jesus' disciples. The question is, which one? 

What first leads to the suspicion that Judas Iscariot is the author, is 
the fact that the author purposly hides his identity on several occas- 
ions. He always speaks of himself as "'another disciple," or "the dis- 
ciple whom Jesus loved." or "'one other disciple." The author must 
have known the name of this ' "other disciple," had it not been himself, 
and being so careful to mention all other things, even to small details, 
we can only conclude that he covered up the name of this disciple for 
some good reason. 

According to this book, the two disciples who first followed Jesus 
were Andrew and another disciple. Why did not the book tell us his 
name? These two immediately found Simon Peter. This book says 
Judas was the son of Simon. I believe Judas was the son of Simon 



2 JUDAS ISCARIOT 

Peter, and the nephew of Andrew, and not the son of Simon, called 
Zelotes, as most commentators think. 

It will probably be asserted that Judas died immediately after the 
crucifiction. and therefore could not have been the author of this book. 
There are two accounts of his death : one is that he committed suicide 
by hanging; (Mat. xxviii. 3, 4, 5,) another is that he fell headlong, 
burst asunder and his bowels gushed out; (Acts i. 18.) As the authors 
of Mathew and the Acts were neither of them eye-witnesses of 
the things they relate, but gathered the concents of their books from 
the people, it is not surprising that they heard and believed ttfany 
strange stories. We are told by the New Testament in several places 
that many false reports got abroad and were generally believed, and 
this story of the death of Judas, especially as related in Acts, has 
every appearance of a false tradition, and this is the more probable be- 
cause the other three gospels say nothing of the death of Judas. 

I believe it was at the sea of Tiberius (John xx 1. 2.) where Jesus 
last appeared to his disciples that he separated Judas from the others, 
and Peter looking back saw Judas and said "Lord and what shall this 
man do?" It is a curious fact that the book ends with this scene, and 
makes no mention of the ascension spoken of in Mark xvi. 19. Luke 
xxiv. 50., and Actsi. 9. Would John have failed to mention the as- 
cension ? 

The last six paragraphs in the book of John are in these words; 
"Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved, fol- 
lowing: (which also leaned on his breast at supper and said, "Which 
is he that betray eth thee?) Peter seeing him, said to Jesus, Lord, and 
what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry 
till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me. Then went this 
saying abroad among the bretheren, that that disciple should not die ; 
yet Jesus said not that he should not die, but If I will that he tarry till 
I come, what is that to thee? This is the disciple which testilieth of 
these things : and we know that his testimony is true. And there are 
also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be 
written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not con- 
tain the books that should be written. Amen." 

The above quotation from the book of John shows several facts. 
One is that the 4 'beloved disciple" testified of these things and wrote 
these things, or, in other words, wrote the book of John, so called. 
All commentators agree that the w *beloved disciple" is the author of 
this book. Neither of the other gospels speak of a "beloved disciple," 
or indicate that John was any more beloved than Peter or James. 
Judas was probably the youngest of the twelve because his father was 
also a disciple with them. Judas carried the purse and probably made 
all the collections, and at least was entrusted to buy such things as 
were needed by the disciples, and distributed the gifts to the poor. 



AUTHOR OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 



This shows that Jesus trusted him, and it was probably due to his 
youth partly, for older disciples could better attend to the more relig- 
ious duties aud instructions. 

The word "we" in the next to the last verse is important. This word 
"we" appears also in the last verse of the last epistle of John. It was 
customary in those days to employ a scribe to do the writing. Paul 
wrote but one of his epistles with his own hand. Peter employed a 
sciibe (2nd Peter v. 12.) and we may well conclude that Judas did also. 

That Judas was not a traitor will be shown further on, although he 
went to the enemy in the guise of a betrayer, but he only did as Jesus 
told him privately to do. This was partly why he believed himself the 
specially beloved, because he was given a task for which all men 
would brand him with infamy. But beside this, at the crucifiction, 
when all the other disciples had fled for safety, Jesus consigned his 
mother to the life-long care of Judas, who alone of all the disciples 
could live in safety among the Jews, because he was no longer con- 
sidered one of the hated Christians, and the proof of this will be given 
further on as we wish to deal at present with the above quotation from 
the book of John. 

Besides showing that the "beloved disciple" wrote the book, it shows 
also that a false report of what Jesus said had not only got abroad but 
was also believed by the brethern, namely, that Jesus had declared 
that the beloved disciple should not die. That this false report should 
prevail among the brethern is significant, for it was a most import- 
ant statement about one of their own number. Judas was separated 
from this number, and on motion of Peter a new disciple was chosen 
to fill his place. The brethern might believe this about Judas, for he 
was not there to carrect it. But no such false report could be believed 
by them about John, for John was with them and could and would 
have corrected it. They believed that only through death could they 
receive their great reward, and it was natural that they might believe 
that Jesus had declared that Judas should never die, for all, save prob- 
ablj T Peter, believed Judas had been a traitor to Jesus. 

In the Holy Land a belief still prevails that an ancient evil-doer was 
forbidden to die and that same wandering Jew is still roaming about 
the earth. To be forbidden to die was in their belief a curse and in no 
sense could it be applied to John, yet it was a perfectly natural error 
to fall into about Judas. In the passage above cited it is also further 
evident that the author does not like this false report, for he is very 
clear and emphatic in his correction of it* 

The quotation further shows in the last paragraph two facts; first 
that the author does not think that his book contains an account of all 
the things that Jesus did. It indicates that he had written only the 
very few things that he himself knew to be true, and the whole book 
indicates the same thing. Secoudly : that the author was a very ignor- 



4 JUDAS ISCARIOT 



ant man, for he says he supposes the world itself would not contain 
the books that would give an account of all that Jesus did. Probably 
the number of sheepskius it took to write his book on made quite a pile 
in itself. Judas probably wrote this book when he was an old man, 
and he had no doubt heard thousands of marvelous tales about the 
things Jesus had done, and this is why he thought skins enough to 
write them all on wonld fill the world. He had probably heard many 
statements that he knew to be false and he wrote the book that concer- 
ning certain matters the exact truth might be known. He was care- 
ful to state which was the first and which was the second miracle Jesus 
did after his baptism, and he made several other statements in a simi- 
lar manner, as though he was specially anxious there should be no 
coniusion on the point. 

On the occasion when Mary was anointing Jesus, (John xii. 6,) Judas 
recommended that the ointment be sold and the proceeds given to the 
poor, and in narrating it he says he cared nothing for the poor, but he 
was a thief and carried the bag. This was certainly a hard thing for 
one to say about himself, although he was disguising his authorship. 
But in his mature years he looked back on that event only to be filled 
with the bitterness his words express. He was no doubt selfish at that 
time, loved money, thought but little of religion and cared but little 
for the poor, and certainly could not then have realized the significance 
of the anointing, and he was probably not more honest than other 
young men of his time who had been raised as he was; and, looking 
back on all this in his mature years, the words he has written could 
well have expressed his feelings. He believed Jesus had known 

every good and bad impulse of his heart, yet loved and trusted him ; 
and finally, though the youngest, Jesus placed upon him the heaviest 
burden of all, and it is not surprising that he loved to write of himself 
as "tjje disciple whom Jesus loved," though he could not tell his name 
and have his book received by the Christian world. 

That John would not have written such harsh things about Judas is 
evident from the tone of the whole New Testament. When the new 
disciple was chosen, Peter spoke of Judas in these words. (Acts i. 1G} : 
'"Men and brethren; this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, 
which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning 
Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus/' Peter here speaks 
of Judas as a guide prophesied of in the time of David as necessary to 
fulfill the Scriptures. 

It is not probable that John would have referred to him in any 
harsher or different tones. Verses 18 and 19, following the above quo- 
tation, might, to a careless reader, appear to be quoted from Peter's 
speach ; they describe the death and buiial of Judas. It reads : — 

18 "Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; 
and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst and all his bowleg 



AUTHOR OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 



gushed out." 

16. "And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch 
as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, 
the field of blood. 

These two verses are historical, and descriptive of the language used 
in Jerusalem. For those reasons they could not have been quoted from 
Peter's speach, for Peter was speaking in Jerusalem at the time, and to 
the natives, and on the next day after the ascension. I have been 
the more particular about this because many have thougnt it was the 
language of Peter that is describing the death and burial of Judas. 

There is one part of the book of John, viz., from verse 31 in chap, 
xiii. to the end of chap, xvii., that is a long sermon so much like the 
Sermon on the Mount that it is probablj' mixed up with it. It pur- 
ports to have been delivered at the supper table after Judas went out to 
notify the authorities where to find Jesus, and only the other eleven 
were present to hear it, and it is certainly too long for any man to have 
remembered and written down. With this part left out, the whole 
book is one connected narrative, and such a one as one in Judas' con- 
dition might have easily remembered and written at any time in his 
life afterward. Judas may have written this sermon, but it looks like 
a stray parchment that belongs to some other book or to another place 
in this book. I believe it belongs to another book. 

Verses 21 to 31 inclusive in chap. xiii. are as follows : 

21. "When Jesus had thus said, lie was troubled in spirit, and testi- 
fied and said: 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall be- 
tray me.' 

22. "Then the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he 
spake. 

23. "Now there was leaning on Jesus 1 bosom one of his disciples 
whom Jesus loved. 

24. "Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him that he should ask who 
it should be of whom he spake. 

25. k *He then lying on Jesus' breast, said unto him, ; Lord who is it?' 

26. "Jesus answered. *He it is to whom I shall give a sop, when I 
have dipped it.' And when he had dipped the sop he gave it to Judas 
Iscariot, the son of Simon. 

27 fc, And niter the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus un- 
to him, "That thou doest, do quickly." 

Now. the careless reader might suppose that all at the table knew 
who was to betray Jesus, and that he was told to go about it quickly; 
but notice the three next verses : — 

28. "Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this 
unto him. 

29. "For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that 
Jesus had said unto him, 'Buy those things we have need of against the 



JUDAS ISCARIOT 



feast; or, that he should give something to the poor.' 

30. He then having received the s Dp, went immediately out, and it 
was night. 

31. "Therefore when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of 
man glorified, and God is glorified in him." 

The begining of chap, xviii. makes a connected story from this on, 
and if Judas wrote the intervening as it appears, he used it in a man- 
ner to hide his identity. But the above ten verses quoted from chap, 
xiii. are very important. Verse 24 says Peter beckoned to the beloved 
disciple to ask which one would betray him, and the beloved disciple 
while leaning on his breast said, "Lord, who is it?" "Jesus answered," 
&c. To whom could Jesus have answered but to the deloved disciple? 
It is evident Peter did not ask his question in words — he asked by a 
sign or beckoning, and evidently none present understood Peter's ques- 
tion or suspected that he had asked anything but the beloved disciple, 
for verse 28 begins, "Now, no man at the table knew,"&c. 

It is quite clear that not even Peter heard what Jesus answered to 
the disciple leaning on his breast, for it saj r s no man at the table knew 
the meaning of Jesus' words addressed to Judas, viz., "That thou do- 
est, do quickly." Peter would have known the meaning of this if he 
had, after his sign, heaid what Jesus said about the sop. If Judas had 
been leaning on Jesus' breast he could have easily understood witnout 
the others catching the words, and this is the only solution to the mys- 
tery, that only Judas understood Jesus. For the occasion was such, 
and the signs and words were all so important that the whole would 
have been evident to all of them if Peter's beckoning had been under- 
stood or even noticed. Had John written the book it would have read : 
"For some of us thought." instead of "Some of them." That sentence 
was consistent alone for Judas to write. The author also mentions 
that it was night when Judas got outside. Who would remember this 
better than Judas, judging of his mission and probable state of mind at 
that moment? 

The above quotation also shows that Judas had never dreamed of 
showing the authorities Avhere Jesus concealed himself nights, until 
Jesus told them all at the table that one should betray him. and not 
even then unril the sop had been handed to Judas. It was then that 
"Satan entered into him." It is, evident that he thought he had done 
wrong in betraying Jesus, and that he believed Satan had inspired him, 
and that his own vileness of heart had enabled Satan to take that pos- 
session of him. Thus he believed in his own vileness and the wicked- 
ness of the act. And it, is quite probable he took the bribe that was 
offered only to learn that he could not'use it, for Jesus or the brethern 
who would cast him out, and further remembering that Jesus had not 
authorized him to take anything for the service, and had always con- 
demned covetousness. All these reflections naturally led to self-re- 



AUTHOR OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 



proach. 

This book says the Church authorities did not dare arrest Jesus dur- 
ing the day for fear of the multitude, and this is why they sought him 
by night when alone, or only with his disciples. At the Last Supper, 
when Peter spoke with a sign or motion it would indicate that the dis- 
ciples felt the need of keeping very quiet, and if Jesus had spoken only 
in a whisper to Judas it would not have been surprising. (Mat. xxvi. 
36 to 46 ; Luke xxii. 44.) His fervent prayer in the garden was perfect- 
ly consistent, but Peter. James, and John would not have slept then, 
had they understood the mission Judas was on. This also indicates 
that Peter did not understand Jesus' words to Judas, and John could 
not have been on his breast, for the disciples were also endangered by 
the exposior. 

When Jesus was arrested he said, "Take me and let these go," and 
they arrested Jesus only. The subsequent experience of Peter (Mat. 
xxvi. 56, 58 and 74) shows the danger the disciples were in if they 
could be identified. Peter had to deliberately falsify and curse and 
swear to convince theni that he was not a disciple. After the arrest 
described in John xviii. verse 15 begins as follows : — 

15. "And Simon Peter followed Jesus and so did another disciple. 
That disciple was known unto the high priest, and went in with Jesus 
into the palace oi tiie high priest. 

16. "But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other 
disciple which was known unto the high priest and spake unto her that 
kept the door, and brought in Peter. 

17. "Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, 'Art not 
thou also one of this man's disciples'?' He saith, *I am not.' 

18. "And the servents and officers stood there, who had made a fire 
of coals (for it was cold.) and they warmed themselves, and Peter 
stood with them and warmed himself." 

Thus the chapter goes on describing in this minute manner all that 
occured in the presence of "that other disciple" thus showing that 
'•that other disciple" must have written the account. But it shows 
more. It says that "that other disciple ' was known unto the high 
priest. Who but Judas, among Jesus' disciples, could have been so 
favorably known by the high priest that he could have influence with 
the servents to let in a stranger? as he persuaded her to let in Peter. 
Judas had just been there all the evening for the purpose of conduct- 
ing the posse they were getting together to arrest Jesus. It is thus 
natural that Judas should be perfectly safe In this palace and have 
some influence with the servants while Pete)* was unknown and in dan- 
ger. This same ••other disciple" also went over to the judgement hall 
and appears to have entered there also; the priests did not enter, yet 
'•that other disciple" appears to be perfectly safe, though P^ter had 
denied his identity and fled for safety. How could John have filled the 
place of "'tusit other disciple" on this occasion? No one but Judas 



8 JUDAS ISCARIOT 



could have filled it. To him all was safe, and the story seems perfectly 
natural. 

In those days women were not held accountable for crimes ; their 
husbands, fathers or guardians, were held accountable for the conduct 
of the women, as though the women were property like cattle. For 
this reason the women were at the cross, but "that other disciple*' was 
, the only man there that had been a friend of Jesus, and in this connect- 
ion verses 34 and 35 of chap. xix. are important. They read : — 

34. "But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forth- 
with came thereout blood and water. 

35. "And he that saw it, bare record, and his record is true, and he 
knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. 

This certainly is the statement of the author of the book of what he 
saw with his own eyes, and he sterns very anxious that this statement 
should be believed. It had probably been denied. It certainly indi- 
cates an honest and positive authorship. Verses 38 and 39 of chap, 
xix. show that the disciples feared to be known. The following should 
be cited. John xix. : — 

25 "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his 
mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cieophas, and Mary Magdalene. 

26. "When Jesus therefore saw his mother and the disciple standing 
by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, 'Woman, behold thy son. 

27. "Then saith he to the disciple, 'Behold thy mother.' And from 
that hour that disciple took her unto his own home. 

The above shows several facts : First, that there were four women 
at the cross, and this one un-named disciple. Also that Jesus assigned 
his mother to the keeping of that disciple. Being thus assigned to take 
Jesus' place in the care of Jesus' mother would certainly convince even 
Judas that he was the beloved disciple. This is the more important, 
because the mother of Jesus had at least six other children, as appears 
by the following. Mat. xiii. 55, 5G. reads: — 

"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary, and 
his brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas. And his sisters, 
are they not all with us. 

To the same effect in Mark vi. 3. In Paul's epistle to the Galatians 
i. 19, he says, concerning persons he met in Jerusalem, "But other of 
the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother." 

The reason Jesus had for not leaving his mother in the care of her 
other four sons must be that they had become followers of his and 
would always be in jeopardy. Judas Iscarnt was alone safe from per- 
secution. 

We will quote once more from the book of John to show that the 
author purposely hides his identity. John xx. 1-10, reads as follows; — 

1. "The first dav of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it 
was yet dark, unto the sepulcher, and seeth the stone taken away from 



AUTHOR OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 9 



the sepulcher. 

2. "Then she runneth and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other 
disciple whom Jesus loved, and said unto them, '"They have taken 
away the Lord out of the sepulcher, and we know not where they have 
laid him. 

3. "Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to 
the sepulcher. 

4. "So they ian both together, and the other disciple did outrun 
Peter, and came first to the sepulcher. 

5. "And he stooping down and looking in, saw the linen cloth lying, 
yet went he not in. 

6. "Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sep- 
ulcher and seeth the linen cloth lie. 

7. "And the napkin that was about his head, not lying with the linen 
cloth, but wrapped together in a place by itself. 

8 "Then went in also that other disciple which came first to the sep- 
ulcher, and saw, and believed. 

9. For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again 
from the dead. 



\ 



"Then the disciples went away again unto their own home." 

/ iat reason could John have for thus coucealing his name? Verses 

1 i 2 of chap. xxi. are as follows : — 

/"After these things Jesus showed himself again to the disciples at 
/sea of Tiberias ; and on this wise showed he himself. 

fl. "There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, 
and Nathaniel of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebidee, and two 
other of his disciples." 

This second verse is important because it contains the only reference 
to John or his brother James that occurs anywhere in this book of 
John, and here they are only mentioned as the sons of Zebidee. Neith- 
er of their names appear in the book. If John had written the book 
would he thus have ignored the name of his brother? 

John the Baptist is frequently spoken of but not John the son of Zeb- 
idee who is supposed to be "the beloved disciple. 

The gospel of John, so called, mentions only seven of the disciples 
by name, viz : Peter, Andrew, Phillip, Nathaniel, Thomas, Judas Iscar- 
iot and Judas. This book merely says that the last named Judas is not 
Iscariot (xiv. 22) and Acts i. 13 says the same. 

When Judas Iscariot was left behind these at the sea of Tiberias nev- 
er to see Jesus or the other disciples again, the fish they had caught 
were evidently left with him, and probably the nets, boats and the bus- 
iness also to enable him to support his new charge, Jesus' mother and 
sisters. He tells us there were 153 fish. (vi. 11) The next day a new 
disciple was chosen to take his place with the twelve and these remain- 
ed at Jerusalem until after the day of Pentecost, (see Acts 1. 16 and ii. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

029 822 363 6 

10 JUDAS ISCARIOT 

1.) Then scattered and gave their lives to the ministry. 

Seeing that the u beloved disciple" twiee declaired that he wrote the 
book, and many times purposly covers up his own name, and leaves out 
everything that was specially important to John, and also did things 
that Judas alone could have done, — does not this all point to one con- 
clusion, namely, that Judas Iscariot wrote the book ascribed to John? 

Did Judas write the three epistles ascribed to John? In those days 
it was customary to begin an epistle with the name of the author, and 
not sign the name at the last end as we do. All the epistles in the 
New Testament begin with the name of the author except the three 
epistles ascribed to John, and the epistle to the Hebrews. The epistle 
to the Hebrews closes by saying it was u Written to the Hebrews 
from Italy by Timothy." The three epistles ascribed to John do not 
tell who wrote them, or to whom they were written, or where, or when 
written. The second epistle begins : u The elder unto the elect lady 
and her children." and in closing this letter to her, he says; u The 
children of thy elect sister greet thee, amen." 

If the author had married one of Jesus' sisters, who, (by caring for 
the mother.) must have been in his care also, and his wife had die ^ 
leaving him children, then, in that case , we can understand the me 
ing of "the elect lady?' and the greeting he sends her from the childi 
of her "elect sister.'^ There seems to be no other explanation to V 
letter than that the "beloved disciple" became the brother-in-la , ■ 
Jesus. 

The next to the last verse in this second epistle reads : — 

"Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with pa- 
per and ink. but I trust to come unto you and speak face to face, that 
our joy may be full." 

This spirit of secrecy does not appear in any other writings but those 
ascribed to John. All this would be consistent for Judas Iscariot but 
not for John. Who then but Judas can be the author? 

I believe John the son of Zebidee wrote Revelations, but there is not 
the least evidence that he wrote the gospel or either of the epistles that 
are ascribed to him. 

James, and Judas the brother of James, I believe were brothers of 
Jesus, and that James the brother of Jesus wrote the "Epistle of 
James," and that Judas the brother of James, whom Mark calls Juda 
(vi. 3) is a brother of Jesus and the author of the "Epistle of Jude" 
(see Jude i. 1) Thus three of the sons of Mary are founders of the 

New Testament, and Judas Iscariot was the most carefully truthful and 
faithful of Jesus biographers. 

As Judas, the archetype of all traitors, can be acquitted, so all men 
will be found good hearted toward the just. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



029 822 363 6 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH 8.5 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



029 822 363 6 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH 8.5 



